Terri Schiavo & sanctity of life Dominus Vobiscum bogeyman

PAT BUCHANAN, NBC POLITICAL ANALYST: What George Bush ought to do right now is send federal marshals in and pick up Terri Schiavo and put that breathing tube back into her--excuse me, the food and hydration tube back into her, as this is taken up to the United States Supreme Court. He took an oath, Chris, to defend the Constitution of the United States. He has got an obligation, as well as these judges do, to defend that Constitution. And that means to protect this woman‘s life.
MATTHEWS: What happened to the 10th Amendment?
reads: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."]
BUCHANAN: Look, the 10th Amendment has been dead as a door nail, Chris.
MATTHEWS: Well, it‘s our Constitution.

I have been lambasted elsewhere for my comments here in regard to Terri Schiavo. Then in lieu of a response, this article was thrown into the debate for good measure. It's strident call --which began with a quote about Nazi doctors and the Third Reich's eugenics program-- insisted :

The reason for this public support of removal from ordinary sustenance, I believe, is not that most people understand or care about Terri Schiavo. Like many others with disabilities, I believe that the American public, to one degree or another, holds that disabled people are better off dead. To put it in a simpler way, many Americans are bigots.

Oh my!I'm not the type to raise their hands aloft and plead for the middle ground. Nor am I partial to being cowed before passionate self righteousness regardless how stridently asserted(or by whom). So I seek only to restate my argument for the betterment of the blog reading public:

The question of disability rights is important and is often abstracted from everyday activity. But to turn the Schiavo case on that issue alone won't get you very far in that regard. If you want to go down an ethical path (which I primarily consider to be one of personal choice in the final instance) then Pre-Natal Testing and selective abortion based on those test results is a potent challenge to anyone's notion of disability and confronts us, but pregnant women especially, much more frequently than the vegetative state or otherwise of Terri Schiavo.
So would you have it that pre-natal testing be abolished?
Thats' why it has to be the woman's right to choose (both to have or not have the test and to abort or not to abort)as it is the Schiavo's husband's right to decide in this case.
Ultimately, people must be given the right and the space to decide their options and move on without fear of being held censurable.
I don't think it is obligatory that the husband should have decided one way or the other but I respect his decision as I can so strongly empathise with him. Neither he nor his wife deserve the theological and legal circus that has descended upon her bedside.

Of course if you want to partake of another point of view, I recommend that you visit Blogs for Terri. I don't do that because I'm trying to be even handed -- I just want you to be afraid, very afraid, because the sanctity of life Dominus Vobiscum bogeyman is stalking us all. In the light of her opportune utility I do hope Terri Schiavo appreciates her enlisted function. While she may not be able to note the fact in her present state, the serendipity of her condition has served those who would exploit her passing so well that I can only allude to Charles Dickens:

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.